i have a maneuver master/ lore warden with the flurry of maneuvers ability. i was wondering if i could use combat expertise in the middle of my flurry? i would trip at -2 to hit, then my opponent would be easier to hit while prone and maybe flanked. the effects of CE would last till my next attack.

too much number crunching cheese? lol...

Seemed like this thread pretty much determined that "attack" in this context means "attack action". (This is how I would run it as well)

So, no, FoM is a "full-attack action", and you can only activate it at the start.

I have to agree here, that while retrieving it gets reduced to a free action, the language about donning it is unaffected.

However, it is not unreasonable to argue that the full-round action cited includes both drawing and donning (otherwise the RAW action economy on this item is truly horrendous), which implies that donning a scizore you already have in hand would be a standard. (Has this been discussed before? Do we know if the intent on this item under normal circumstances requires a move to draw and 2 standard actions to finish donning it?)

Quote:

Could he don it while moving?

*"as part of a move"? No

but you can split the full round action into two standard actions as I just mentioned above. Otherwise it would need to get reduced to a free action in some manner.

Quote:

Does he need a free hand to strap it on?

I can't find this directly addressed by the rules atm, but it's pretty strongly implies that the answer is yes given how many other things need a free hand and the language about donning making it comparative to actual armor. (I'm assuming there's some type of strap that needs to be tightened here and that you can't simply slide your hand into the weapon.)

Animals, as defined by the animal type in the Bestiary, have no rule about what they will or will not attack.

The Handle Animal skill has an option to command an animal to attack. It then lists a limit to what you can order the animal to attack.

That doesn't mean animals can't attack other things - just that you can't use Handle Animal for that.

My problem with this position is that the additional information in the HA description essentially counts the same as a "Normal:" entry on a feat... animals, in general, don't normally, willingly, (and/or purposely), attack things outside of the list. (and even then are only occasionally found to attack things that are on the list outside of other animals)

Certainly an animal would defend itself, but it's much more likely to flee than fight.

(Also, I don't see any conflict between the spell description and HA, all rules should apply)

3 people marked this as FAQ candidate.
1 person marked this as a favorite.

FAQ requests

1.Does the Grab granted by Final Embrace apply to all of your natural weapons (including Unarmed Strike), just one, or just one type? And are there restrictions on type as in the Eidolon entry for Grab?

2.Does the 2nd level ability Constrict(Ex) gained by the White-Haired Witch archetype qualify as a prerequisite for Final Embrace?

I'm not surprised this was largely ignored as it's a very sticky situation with a poorly worded feat...

RAW, FE indeed seems to be linguistically ambiguous about "the constrict special attack", implying that any special attack with that name qualifies as a prerequisite.

RAI, it is most likely unintended for the WHW Constrict(Ex) to serve as a prereq.
The evidence here is that specific article "the" (not "a") in front of "constrict special attack" that very strongly implies it's talking about the UMR version of Constrict exclusively.
Now, this interpretation, strictly, should also exclude the Eidolon version, which is only triggered by a successful Grab; although I do doubt that Eidolons are intended to be excluded.

The primary distinction is the action type (this would technically allow you to get Constrict damage twice for that hair, once automatically[not an action] and again as a swift), which seems very unintended.

As to which attacks can/would be modified by Grab:
As you note, again, it is ambiguous, but we do have source material that is highly suggestive of which attacks normally have Grab attached. The list for Eidolons is probably the easiest reference. It's fairly unreasonable to expect Grab to apply to every type of attack.
Also, I'm not particularly inclined to restrict the effect of this feat to a single attack or attack type until it gets errata.

Keep in mind also that this archetype is from supplemental material.
As such, it's even more unreasonable to expect the author(s) to account for every interaction such as this.

OK, I understand the common opinion. Can I order a summoned elemental to attack the object then? The elementals have INT 4, and they aren't animals, so there are no clear way to "communicate" with them.

The easiest way would be to have the right language: Aquan, Auran, Ignan, Terran... however they should be smart enough to understand gestures of some sort (again, possibly a full round action).

RAW, a case can be made that the 2 situations you cited aren't "reach weapons" because they do not gain the "reach" weapon property, however, RAI, both the synthesist and the paladin are attacking from reach and probably should not be subject to an ability that seems to exclusively target adjacent melee opponents.

Although, there is room to inflict the save on anyone using natural weapons, as part of their body is technically in range. I'm a bit surprised this isn't expressly mentioned.

I'm not an expert, but I don't see why it wouldn't work. The first specifically says you can use Bluff instead of Intimidate to demoralize a foe, and the second specifically says you're using Intimidate to demoralize a foe. Sounds like it could be a fun character. :)

Thanks, i'm also the idea it will work, i just wanted to be sure because with all the "specific overwrite generic" rule one can never sleep good.

Thanks again

Taunt is written kind of awkwardly for its (apparent) intent.

I can see a RAW stickler wagging their finger at you, but RAI is likely that "you can substitute Bluff for any Intimidate:Demoralize skill check"

I just believe that one can dismiss a different interpretation, based solely on the category a feat falls under.

Imagine, if a player wanted to use Monkey Style, to give himself a better chance at jumping over a gap, by adding his wisdom to Acrobatics.

Would he have to start a fight first?

Re: Monkey Style

Just about every style feat has 2 entries
A) a flat benefit
B) an entry with the clause "while using this style"

I understand that *some* individuals seemingly parse it differently, but it's a pretty asinine position imo.
(However, even if it's intended that you need to use the style, I don't recall activation being limited to combat.)

Re: BWG
The table text also supports your position btw, which may add credence to the notion that that word "also" was not omitted by accident.

although I disagree about many of the assertions that you often qualify without it

I don't think I understand your reference, or what it is you are disagreeing with.

Seriously? That feat lets you flank with yourself and be multiple locations at roughly the same time (same initiative count), effectively enabling activation of just about any TW feat. Without it, you are usually up a creek to use them solo.

I disagree with your RAI that BWG can be solo (and/or that the activator gets an AoO), but will acknowledge the RAW can be read to support it.

I appreciate the analysis, however it almost completely ignores the source material. (I believe the earliest printing would be RToEE for 3.0, later adapted in Complete Divine. As this is a thread about RToEE, that is my focus.)

This is primarily my issue with the original version of the conversion you chose to modify as well, because nowhere in the source does it suggest that "ghost touch" has anything to do with the theme of the domain and seems more like a)a self serving and capricious choice by the author and b)an easy out in lieu of coming up with something more force-centric

Note how the 3.x power is both self only and 1/day (and ostensibly a free action considering how it seems to be intended to work)

I agree with your assessment that a weird "immediate standard action" is out of place for PF, but he also reversed the polarity on the ability

If I were to rewrite it, I'd keep it as a free action, self only ability usable once per round and probably go with times/day == WIS (though 3+WIS is hardly OP)

Regarding Magic Missiles... I suspect granting it as 2nd level is intentional because divine casters already have nice things.
Also, it is not out of line in terms of a design choice as numerous "cross class" spells granted in similar manners are not given at the lowest possible spell level. (Further, I know of at least 1 prestige class that allows you to learn otherwise unobtainable spells at the cost of +1 spell level in your book/repertoire)

But I'm not intending to be over critical, as there should be lots of room for variant subdomains under Force, regardless of which is considered prime. (Namely, that a "Shielding" subdomain could quite easily focus on defense and include ghost touch powers)

That said, I am in no way surprised Paizo has omitted publishing an official update to this particular domain

Thank you, this is a much better version than that conversion you linked to first.

However, I do have some critiques.

Force Bolt
We have a model for this in the Sage bloodline (although I suspect it might not have been published when you posted this)
In essence, it should either damage or bull rush, but doing both is a bit too powerful for a 1st level power (allowing the caster to select either pushes the limit, but may not break it). I suspect most players would prefer a damage version.

9th spell
Other sources, including the 3.5 adaptation, replace this with Crushing Hand, which is much more in line with the power players should wield.

However, I am inclined to adhere more strictly to the 3.0 source material for the sake of this module (especially considering players shouldn't be using this domain, since they likely won't worship Tharizdun).

Still, Annihilation is a ridiculously powerful spell because it replicates the functionality of 2 artifacts...
To bring it more in line with the philosophies of PFRPG, I'd suggest the following changes

Using a blast of dark force, you tear a temporary hole in the fabric of reality. This hole takes on the form of a sphere of annihilation. You control the sphere as if you possessed a talisman of the sphere. Targets of this sphere may make a reflex save that negates cover to reduce their damage. A successful save deals only 5d10 damage, but anything killed by this damage is still annihilated. At the end of the duration, the hole seals itself and the sphere disappears.

Perhaps the damage should be higher, but I extrapolated from disintegrate... I suspect the only way to dial in on an 'equitable for 9th level' figure would be lots of play testing.

My logic
1. it is essentially an instakill on everything if a save is not added
2. it is essentially acting like a Trample (hence reflex)
3. controlling the sphere remains a free action
4. it can affect multiple targets per round (see 1)

concerning point 3, an alternative might be to make the duration: "concentration, up to 1 round/level", but that seems too far

Which if we were working from those tables and the wording of Sneak Attack would mean that Flat-footed doesn't allow Sneak as it is "loses" not "denied".

This is fairly pedantic, as we have numerous instances of FF being called out as vulnerable to SA

Scout(Rogue archetype) wrote:

Scout's Charge (Ex): At 4th level, whenever a scout makes a charge, her attack deals sneak attack damage as if the target were flat-footed. Foes with uncanny dodge are immune to this ability. This ability replaces uncanny dodge.

Skirmisher (Ex): At 8th level, whenever a scout moves more than 10 feet in a round and makes an attack action, the attack deals sneak attack damage as if the target was flat-footed. If the scout makes more than one attack this turn, this ability only applies to the first attack. Foes with uncanny dodge are immune to this ability. This ability replaces improved uncanny dodge.

To add to your list:

Climb wrote:

You need both hands free to climb, but you may cling to a wall with one hand while you cast a spell or take some other action that requires only one hand. While climbing, you can't move to avoid a blow, so you lose your Dexterity bonus to AC (if any). You also can't use a shield while climbing. Anytime you take damage while climbing, make a Climb check against the DC of the slope or wall. Failure means you fall from your current height and sustain the appropriate falling damage.

At 9th level, you can use the Stealth skill even while being observed and without cover or concealment, as long as you are within 10 feet of a shadow other than your own. In addition, when within an area of darkness or dim light, as a standard action you may choose to switch places with a willing ally within 60 feet, who must also be in darkness or dim light. At 13th level, you can instead switch the positions of two willing allies, each of whom must be within 60 feet of you. Unless otherwise noted, this travel is identical to dimension door. You may use the ability to switch places once per day at 9th level, plus one additional time per day at 17th level and 20th level.

Are you trying to use a 5ft step to trigger a feat that needs 10ft+ of movement? Seems pretty cheesy.

But upward movement doesn't have to cost double, only when it's done quickly.

Fly wrote:

Without making a check, a flying creature ... can rise at half speedat an angle of 45 degrees

Then it lists the DC to rise at an angle greater than 45 degrees.

Also, keep in mind that your uphill example might require a climb check as part of that movement, which would also cost extra movement unless you had a Climb speed.

Combat:5-Foot Step wrote:

You may not take a 5-foot step using a form of movement for which you do not have a listed speed.

The issue with moving up, is that it applies a movement penalty (effectively costing 10ft of movement), otherwise, you probably could 5ft step upwards.

Also, addressing my opening question --even though you spend 10ft to move 5ft in this situation, it still only counts as 5ft worth of movement for Wind Stance because that's all you've done.

I'd have to search a bit, but I know there are a couple of abilities out there that allow you to move 5ft w/o expending a 5ft step under very strict conditions. (I think at least one is worded "even if you've already taken a 5ft step") It might be somewhat rules sketchy to effectively combine them with a 5ft step to combine a 5ft rise with the rest of your round, but it doesn't seem unreasonable either.

Ignoring all the gaining abilities before you have them nonsense, Sohei weapon training absolutely stacks with base Fighter weapon training, per the Myrmidarch FAQ I posted earlier. The Myrmidarch and Sohei abilities even use the same base phrasing: gain Weapon Training as the fighter class feature. So a Sohei 6/Fighter 5 will have +2 Training in one group, +1 Training in another group (1 of these two groups must be a sohei group depending on which of sohei 6, fighter 5 was reached first) and can flurry with both groups. The exact interaction only becomes unclear when you multiple archetype modified weapon trainings that are mutually exclusive.

I was going to make a similar argument, and I do think the intent of Sohei class feature is to stack with any other Weapon Training, but Myrmidarch contains the following, which Sohei lacks. They are using it to make a counter-argument.

Weapon Training (Ex) wrote:

At 6th level, a myrmidarch gains weapon training, as the fighter ability, adding an additional weapon group every six levels after 6th (to a maximum of three groups at 18th level) and increasing the bonus on attack and damage rolls for weapon groups already chosen by +1.

Personally, I find the highlighted portion to be a reminder, rather than the enabling factor that separates the 2 abilities.

Also, I think the author of Sohei would have said soemthing similar to 'A Sohei may use FoB/Ki Strike with any weapon from these groups in which he also has WT' if he wanted to limit it... because it's so much easier to expressly limit the ability than to assume people will understand that it is.
Further, I expect that Sohei WT stacks just fine in PFS. (Although there may be just enough wiggle for them to enforce variation at their tables.)

The examples are few, but we have sufficient places where classes (although perhaps more often archetypes) reference another; the best of which may be the Oracle's Curse, since it's "levels or HD other than Oracle".
Channel is bad comparison because it's power relies on class levels(vs number of acquisitions), and very few classes allow their levels to stack for the purposes of Channel.
So, yes, WT depends on class levels, but indirectly. In theory, you could write a feature along the lines of "these levels stack w/ fighter levels to determine WT", but I don't know of one; and the WT FAQ makes it abundantly clear that any class feature which scales with 'how many times you have it' stacks with itself, no matter the source. It is not limited only to the Mydmirarch.

You automatically hit and score a critical hit. If the defender survives the damage, he must make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + damage dealt) or die. A rogue also gets her extra sneak attack damage against a helpless opponent when delivering a coup de grace.

afaik, nonlethal damage is still damage

consider the case of delivering a CdG with a Merciful weapon, or a sap. The damage is nonlethal, but the save would still be based on damage dealt.

Benefit: When an adjacent ally is attacked, you may use an attack of opportunity to attempt the aid another action to improve your ally's AC. You may not use the aid another action to improve your ally's attack roll with this attack.

Normal: Aid another is a standard action.

Bodyguard doesn't mention aiding anything other than AC.

Further, "when an adjacent ally is attacked" is clearly intended to mean "when an adjacent ally's AC is targeted by an attack".

I realize this sort of diminishes the usefulness Aid Allies to certain types of allies (such as someone with Snake Style), but Aid Allies is merely reiterating the standard Aid Another options, making it clear that it applies to all types of uses. Bodyguard is simply 1 type that has a specific limitation on how it modifies Aid Another.

While I've also contemplated why IG is worded the way it is, I'm fairly confident that it does not grant you more benefit than indicated.

That is to say
-the HD are classless/raceless
-the HD do not increase your BAB as we would otherwise expect(you gain a competence bonus instead)
-the HD do not increase saves (although you gain a competence bonus to Fort saves)
-the HD count as "regular" only "for determining the effect of spells that are HD dependent" (Note: it is implied here as "spells that target you", but as written it would also apply to a spell you cast that has an effect based on your HD [independent of any CL])

Now, I do think you have a reasonable RAW argument, and overall, it really doesn't matter too much if they work together since it's a very specific and otherwise suboptimal combination. But, RAI, it likely doesn't work.

Do the HD from IG increase Special Quality DCs that depend on HD(such as poison)?
Can you gain an extra use of Stunning Fist(or similarly scaling abilities)?
That would give more weight to this interpretation.
Currently, it appears the answer to all these things is, "ask your GM".

Before I get into the math, I'd advise against causing the item to fill 2 item slots, it will turn into an annoying restriction that will significantly reduce its value and desirability. If it is taking up both slots, you might as well just give him both items and say they only work when worn together (and the helm affects rhinos instead of elephants).

Now, those 5 are pretty heavily restricted, but I'm unsure exactly what percentage, if any, has been knocked off.
Further, it appears to me, that those 5 have also been considered "similar abilities".

Multiple Similar Abilities wrote:

For items with multiple similar abilities that don't take up space on a character's body, use the following formula: Calculate the price of the single most costly ability, then add 75% of the value of the next most costly ability, plus 1/2 the value of any other abilities.

The current total using "similar abilities"

4k + 0.75*(3k) + 0.5*(2.5k *3) + 1.5*(1k)[EE is dissimilar] == 11.5k

I suppose "dissimilar" is debatable, and all abilities were similar, but that still leaves us w/ 10.5k before accounting for the gore.

Either way, we're left guessing at the percentage reduction. I'll assume it was 30% (since it's the largest in the book, and these are very restricted).

8500 / 0.7 ~= 12150

If EE and Gore are dissimilar
12150 - 11500 = 650; 650 is 50% more for being different, /1.5 ~= 430

If EE is dissimilar, but Gore is similar
12150 - 11500 = 650; 650 has been halved for being similar, *2 == 1300

If EE is similar, but Gore is dissimilar
12150 - 10500 = 1650; 1650 is 50% more for being different, /1.5 ~= 1100

If all abilities were considered similar
12150 - 10500 = 1650; 1650 has been halved for being similar, *2 == 3300

Now, as BBT said, we can't actually know the exact calculation w/o the author stepping forward (very unlikely), but I do think you can use the formulae in the book to guesstimate what has been done.

I have no idea how far off I am w/ these, but a permanent Beast Shape I item would cost 60k according the formula. You're only getting 1 weapon and no other benefit. 430 seems a little low, but any of the others all seem pretty feasible, I'd probably go with ~3.3k and also call it similar for the Rhino Hide.
(The Charge portion costs exactly 1k, if you count the gore as similar, 3.3k +0.75*(1k) ~= 4k (==4050). I'd add 4k to the 9k for +3 armor, for 13,165. I realize this is ignoring that both are dissimilar to armor enhancement bonuses, but it seems to me like Rhino Hide already does that.)
If I'm mistaken about the similar abilities, it means a much greater arbitrary reduction was applied to this item, which throws a major wrench in approximating anything useful.

A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with flurry of blows, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand or with a weapon wielded in both hands. A monk may substitute disarm, sunder, and trip combat maneuvers for unarmed attacks as part of a flurry of blows. A monk cannot use any weapon other than an unarmed strike or a special monk weapon as part of a flurry of blows. A monk with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of a flurry of blows, nor can he make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks.

Best I can tell, "Throwing" is added to an existing shield, but requires an exotic proficiency not to require an Equipment Trick(which incidentally treats the throw as improvised).

Now, the thing is that making a MW shield seem to only be able to affect the item as armor, but the throwing portion seems to be more analogous to spikes, which could be crafted as MW weapons independently of the shield. (I have no evidence to support this other than "Throwing Shield" not having an entry under "Armor" in UE.)
Also, I imagine this means they can be enchanted separately (to maximize use appropriate enchants), but do not have to be (as shields can be enchanted as weapons w/o attaching spikes). (One thing I am unclear about on this point though, is whether "shield", "spikes", and "throwing" have separate, discrete 200k gold caps, or if the combined item has a single cap)

Further, given the separate proficiency for "throwing", it's very likely that it is intended to require separate WF, et al.

As to weapon groups: by and large, bonuses that are intended to apply to a specific mode of attack should be restricted to that mode.
Exceptions exist, but I don't think this is one of them since the functionality is an add-on and not built in to the core item.

Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) as a free action. You may take your move before casting the spell, after touching the target, or between casting the spell and touching the target. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll.

There's no attack (typically), so it shouldn't break stealth, but if there's any visual/audio effect to the spell, that is not hidden and can possibly alert others that something happened.

If, for some reason, you are forced to roll the touch attack (such as Superstition), it probably should break stealth.

I would expect a pre-fatigued target of LoW to become exhausted since there's no restriction on the stacking.

Now, the curious question of what happens if the other fatigue effect is ToF -- I expect you'd get some table variation, but it probably shouldn't stack since it creates a weird exception where ToF is aiding the application of exhaustion while it says it cannot[should not].

Ability Damage is called out separately at the bottom of the section, suggesting it is distinct.

This topic seems to come up every so often, but usually in reference to abilities that flatly add to "damage".

Basically my argument is this
-"Damage" is defined as above
-every place where they intend a SQ to affect "Ability Damage"(and/or "Drain"), it is specifically noted as such
-ergo, every reference to simply "Damage" only entails HP effects

Is it possible for a Level 8 Maneuver Monk to Grapple, Pin, and then Tie Up a target in the same full round action?

No.

Flurry of Maneuvers (Ex) wrote:

At 1st level, as part of a full-attack action, a maneuver master can make one additional combat maneuver, regardless of whether the maneuver normally replaces a melee attack or requires a standard action. The maneuver master uses his monk level in place of his base attack bonus to determine his CMB for the bonus maneuvers, though all combat maneuver checks suffer a –2 penalty when using a flurry.

At 8th level, a maneuver master may attempt a second additional combat maneuver, with an additional –3 penalty on combat maneuver checks.

At 15th level, a maneuver master may attempt a third additional combat maneuver, with an additional –7 penalty on combat maneuver checks.

This ability replaces flurry of blows.

My point is that only the additional maneuvers granted by the class feature benefit from that reduction.

Even if you have Gr Grapple or Rapid Grapple, it still does not reduce a grapple check to replace an attack, so you can only get 2 grapples during a FoM at level 8; the rest of the full attack must be attacks, or actions that can replace attacks.

If the movement started in the 4th row, the 3 that he threatened have only taken a 5ft step, and so did not provoke for their movement.

The difference in what you are asking, is that approaching a Reach wielder from the corner (which he does not threaten since it's 15 ft away) still provokes if the move is more than a 5ft step because it still requires you to move through the 10ft where he does threaten.

Person above linked it, what i was refering to was the very first sentence.

Quick question, would a ninja 2/monk 1 be able to ki strike or use ki points to gain an extra attack on flurry of blows or move farther or etc etc?

The 2nd part of your question doesn't demonstrate what you want. Flurry is a full-attack action and Ninja's Ki Pool allows them to make an extra attack during a full-attack.

No i wasnt using that to prove a point, i was actually curious because it is very similiar in that both classes share an ability that is named the same thing but does something different according to both classes. I am very curious where this is allowed because monk doesnt get ki pool until level 4, so if ninja 2/monk 1 is allowed to ki strike and whatnot that a level 4 monk issuppose to get, then i have no reason not to say Malakai is right in this.

can u show me where it is confirmed that a ninja 2/monk 1 is allowedbto ki strike or use ki points to gain an extra attack in flurry etc etc?

Ki Pool (Su): wrote:

At 2nd level, a ninja gains a pool of ki points, supernatural energy she can use to accomplish amazing feats. The number of points in the ninja's ki pool is equal to 1/2 her ninja level + her Charisma modifier. As long as she has at least 1 point in her ki pool, she treats any Acrobatics skill check made to jump as if she had a running start. At 10th level, she also reduces the DC of Acrobatics skill checks made to jump by 1/2 (although she still cannot move farther than her speed allows).

By spending 1 point from her ki pool, a ninja can make one additional attack at her highest attack bonus, but she can do so only when making a full attack. In addition, she can spend 1 point to increase her speed by 20 feet for 1 round. Finally, a ninja can spend 1 point from her ki pool to give herself a +4 insight bonus on Stealth checks for 1 round. Each of these powers is activated as a swift action. A ninja can gain additional powers that consume points from her ki pool by selecting certain ninja tricks.

The ki pool is replenished each morning after 8 hours of rest or meditation; these hours do not need to be consecutive. If the ninja possesses levels in another class that grants points to a ki pool, ninja levels stack with the levels of that class to determine the total number of ki points in the combined pool, but only one ability score modifier is added to the total. The choice of which score to use is made when the second class ability is gained, and once made, the choice is set. The ninja can now use ki points from this pool to power the abilities of every class she possesses that grants a ki pool.

Flurry of Blows (Ex): wrote:

Starting at 1st level, a monk can make a flurry of blows as a full-attack action. When doing so, he may make on additional attack, taking a -2 penalty on all of his attack rolls, as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat. These attacks can be any combination of unarmed strikes and attacks with a monk special weapon (he does not need to use two weapons to use this ability). For the purpose of these attacks, the monk's base attack bonus from his monk class levels is equal to his monk level. For all other purposes, such as qualifying for a feat or a prestige class, the monk uses his normal base attack bonus.

At 8th level, the monk can make two additional attacks when he uses flurry of blows, as if using Improved Two-Weapon Fighting (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat).

At 15th level, the monk can make three additional attacks using flurry of blows, as if using Greater Two-Weapon Fighting (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat).

A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with flurry of blows, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand or with a weapon wielded in both hands. A monk may substitute disarm, sunder, and trip combat maneuvers for unarmed attacks as part of a flurry of blows. A monk cannot use any weapon other than an unarmed strike or a special monk weapon as part of a flurry of blows. A monk with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of a flurry of blows, nor can he make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks.

I said nothing about Ki Strike, which remains something of an example, but not entirely analogous as it contains "At X level" language in every permissive sentence.

It remains that adding an attack to a FoB is a bad example.

The question you mean to ask is
Can a Monk 1/Ninja 2 spend a ki point to give himself a +4 dodge bonus for 1 round?

An eidolon grows an additional head. The eidolon does not gain any additional natural attacks for the additional head, but the additional head does allow the eidolon to take other evolutions that add an additional attack to a head (such as a bite, gore, or breath weapon). This evolution can be selected more than once.

While they really should have added a line to the APG (is it still on v1?), the issue is that the Head evo was added to UM.

The Bite entry is in error because eidolons could only have a single head at the time of printing. The Head entry I quoted does seem to override the general restriction of taking Bite only once (and further, if you can only take it once, you can't upgrade each one? that makes vary little sense)

I'm not 100% on how this issue is adjudicated for PFS, but I imagine you can take Heads and Bite up to twice for each.